Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 1.102
Filtrar
1.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 5812, 2022 Apr 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35388074

RESUMO

The utilization of vaccines to fight the spread of SARS-CoV-2 has led to a growing need for expansive serological testing. To address this, an EUA approved immunoassay for detection of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in venous serum samples was investigated for use with dried blood spot (DBS) samples. Results from self-collected DBS samples demonstrated a 98.1% categorical agreement to venous serum with a correlation (R) of 0.9600 while professionally collected DBS samples demonstrated a categorical agreement of 100.0% with a correlation of 0.9888 to venous serum. Additional studies were performed to stress different aspects of at-home DBS collection, including shipping stability, effects of interferences, and other sample-specific robustness studies. These studies demonstrated a categorical agreement of at least 95.0% and a mean bias less than ± 20.0%. Furthermore, the ability to track antibody levels following vaccination with the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine was demonstrated with serial self-collected DBS samples from pre-dose (Day 0) out to 19 weeks.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Anticorpos Antivirais , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Teste em Amostras de Sangue Seco/métodos , Humanos
2.
Front Public Health ; 10: 836328, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35450121

RESUMO

Real-world data are needed to establish SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen testing (RAT) as an effective and reliable approach for SARS-CoV-2 screening. This study included 1,952,931 individuals who provided upper respiratory specimens during SARS-CoV-2 screening at CityMD urgent care locations in the New York metropolitan area from October 2020 to March 2021. Positive and negative results, as determined by the BD Veritor™ System for Rapid Detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen (Veritor), were obtained for all individuals, with reflex reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing performed on a case-by-case basis, per standard of care. Using verification bias adjustment, two alternative model assumptions were utilized for RAT results with missing reflex RT-PCR results. The worst antigen diagnostic performance estimates asserted that missing RT-PCR results would show a distribution similar to those RT-PCR results actually obtained, based on symptom category. The best antigen diagnostic performance estimates asserted that individuals without RT-PCR results had a clinical presentation consistent with RAT results, and, therefore, missing RT-PCR results would agree with RAT results. For patients with symptoms or high-risk exposure, 25.3% (n = 86,811/343,253) of RAT results were positive; vs. 3.4% (n = 53,046/1,559,733) positive for asymptomatic individuals without high-risk exposure. Reflex RT-PCR results were obtained from 46.3% (n = 158,836/343,253) and 13.8% (n = 215,708/1,559,733) of symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals, respectively. RT-PCR confirmed 94.4% (4,265/4,518) of positive and 90.6% (139,759/154,318) of negative RAT results in symptomatic individuals; and confirmed 83.4% (6,693/8,024) of positive and 95.3% (197,955/207,684) of negative RAT results in asymptomatic individuals. Applied assumptions for missing reflex RT-PCR results led to worst performance sensitivity estimates of 77.2 and 38.5% in the symptomatic and asymptomatic populations, respectively; assumptions for best performance estimates led to sensitivity values of 85.6 and 84.2%, respectively. Specificity values, regardless of assumptions or symptom category, ranged from 97.9-99.9%. At 10% SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, RAT positive predictive value was 86.9 and 99.0% for worst and best performance estimates across the total population, respectively; negative predictive values were >95% regardless of the applied assumption. Veritor test performance was consistent with that listed in the manufacturer instructions for use for symptomatic individuals. Real-world evidence should be gathered on RATs to support their efficacy as SARS-CoV-2 persists.


Assuntos
Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Teste de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
3.
J Infect Dev Ctries ; 16(3): 418-421, 2022 Mar 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35404845

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Rapid antigen tests to detect SARS-CoV-2 virus need to be validated. The purpose of clinical validation is to place the test into the everyday working process in health care institutions. METHODOLOGY: The clinical validation of Alltest Covid19 antigen test (Alltest, China) and Vivadiag Pro SARS- CoV-2 antigen tests (Vivacheck, China) started in four Slovenian health care institutions in December as a point-of-care test. Institutions compared the results of antigen tests to Seegene Allplex™ 2019-nCoV rt-PCR assay (SeeGene, South Korea) and Cobas 6800 SARS CoV-2 rt-PCR (Roche, USA). RESULTS: Sensitivity (90.6%, 95% CI = 84.94%-94.36%) and specificity (100%, 95% CI = 99.41%-100%) of Vivadiag Pro SARS CoV-2 Ag test were observed. While validating Alltest Covid19 Ag assay we got similar results (sensitivity 94.37%, 95% CI = 89.20% - 97.54%), specificity 100% (95% CI = 98.83% - 100%). CONCLUSIONS: Vivadiag Pro SARS CoV-2 Ag test and Alltest Covid19 test proved to be a good screening tool to detect SARS-CoV-2. The accurate information about the patient's status was available almost immediately and there was no need to wait for rt-PCR results. We could prevent further spread of the SARS-CoV-2 in primary care and hospital settings.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antígenos Virais/análise , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Hospitais , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
4.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 103(2): 115683, 2022 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35421760

RESUMO

The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical performance of STANDARD F COVID-19 Ag FIA (SD Biosensor Inc., Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea), a rapid antigen detection test (RADT) for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2, in patients attended at the Emergency Department with signs or symptoms compatible with COVID-19 that had started in the last 5 days. The clinical performance of the antigen test was compared with RT-PCR, the reference standard. We included 663 specimens from non-repetitive patients. Clinical sensitivity and specificity were 84.0% (95% CI 76.1-89.7) and 99.6% (95% CI 98.5-99.9), respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 98.1% (95% CI 92.7-99.7) and 96.4% (95% CI 94.4-97.7), respectively. The kappa index agreement between RT-PCR and the RADT was 0.89 (95% CI 0.84-0.93). We concluded that STANDARD F COVID-19 Ag FIA is an excellent first-line RADT method to diagnose symptomatic patients in the emergency department.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antígenos Virais/análise , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Humanos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
5.
J Clin Virol ; 148: 105119, 2022 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35248992

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Rapid antigen detection tests (RADT) are commonly used as SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests both by medical professionals and laypeople. However, the performance of RADT in vaccinated individuals has not been fully investigated. OBJECTIVES: RT-qPCR and rapid antigen detection testing were performed to evaluate the performance of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test in detecting SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections in vaccinated individuals. STUDY DESIGN: Two swab specimens, one for RT-qPCR and one for RADT, were collected from vaccinated individuals in an outpatient clinic. For comparison of RADT performance in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, a dataset already published by this group was used as reference. RESULTS: During the delta wave, a total of 696 samples were tested with both RT-qPCR and RADT that included 692 (99.4%) samples from vaccinated individuals. Of these, 76 (11.0%) samples were detected SARS-CoV-2 positive by RT-qPCR and 45 (6.5%) samples by the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test. Stratified by Ct values, sensitivity of the RADT was 100.0%, 94.4% and 81.1% for Ct ≤ 20 (n=18), Ct ≤ 25 (n=36) and Ct ≤ 30 (n=53), respectively. Samples with Ct values ≥ 30 (n=23) were not detected. Overall RADT specificity was 99.7% and symptom status did not affect RADT performance. Notably, RADT detected 4 out of 4 samples of probable Omicron variant infection based on single nucleotide polymorphism analysis. CONCLUSION: Our results show that RADT testing remains a valuable tool in detecting breakthrough infections with high viral RNA loads.


Assuntos
Antígenos Virais/análise , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/normas , COVID-19 , Vacinação , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Humanos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
6.
Bioanalysis ; 14(6): 325-340, 2022 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35234530

RESUMO

Background: With the spread of COVID-19, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests have been utilized. Herein we evaluated the analytical performance of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody test kits using a new reference standard prepared from COVID-19 patient sera. Methods: Fifty-seven kits in total (16 immunochromatography types, 11 ELISA types and 30 types for automated analyzers) were examined. By measuring serially diluted reference standards, the maximum dilution factor showing a positive result and its precision were investigated. Results: The measured cut-off titers varied largely depending on the antibody kit; however, the variability was small, with the titers obtained by each kit being within twofold in most cases. Conclusion: The current results suggest that a suitable kit should be selected depending on the intended purpose.


Assuntos
Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/métodos , Kit de Reagentes para Diagnóstico , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Automação Laboratorial , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/instrumentação , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/normas , Ensaio de Imunoadsorção Enzimática/instrumentação , Ensaio de Imunoadsorção Enzimática/métodos , Humanos , Imunoglobulina G/sangue , Japão , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia
7.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(3): e221313, 2022 03 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35262717

RESUMO

Importance: The immune response in children with SARS-CoV-2 infection is not well understood. Objective: To compare seroconversion in nonhospitalized children and adults with mild SARS-CoV-2 infection and identify factors that are associated with seroconversion. Design, Setting, and Participants: This household cohort study of SARS-CoV-2 infection collected weekly nasopharyngeal and throat swabs and blood samples during the acute (median, 7 days for children and 12 days for adults [IQR, 4-13] days) and convalescent (median, 41 [IQR, 31-49] days) periods after polymerase chain reaction (PCR) diagnosis for analysis. Participants were recruited at The Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, from May 10 to October 28, 2020. Participants included patients who had a SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab specimen using PCR analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) and cellular (T cell and B cell) responses in children and adults. Seroconversion was defined by seropositivity in all 3 (an in-house enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA] and 2 commercial assays: a SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG assay and a SARS-CoV-2 antibody ELISA) serological assays. Results: Among 108 participants with SARS-CoV-2-positive PCR findings, 57 were children (35 boys [61.4%]; median age, 4 [IQR, 2-10] years) and 51 were adults (28 women [54.9%]; median age, 37 [IQR, 34-45] years). Using the 3 established serological assays, a lower proportion of children had seroconversion to IgG compared with adults (20 of 54 [37.0%] vs 32 of 42 [76.2%]; P < .001). This result was not associated with viral load, which was similar in children and adults (mean [SD] cycle threshold [Ct] value, 28.58 [6.83] vs 24.14 [8.47]; P = .09). In addition, age and sex were not associated with seroconversion within children (median age, 4 [IQR, 2-14] years for both seropositive and seronegative groups; seroconversion by sex, 10 of 21 girls [47.6%] vs 10 of 33 boys [30.3%]) or adults (median ages, 37 years for seropositive and 40 years for seronegative adults [IQR, 34-39 years]; seroconversion by sex, 18 of 24 women [75.0%] vs 14 of 18 men [77.8%]) (P > .05 for all comparisons between seronegative and seropositive groups). Symptomatic adults had 3-fold higher SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels than asymptomatic adults (median, 227.5 [IQR, 133.7-521.6] vs 75.3 [IQR, 36.9-113.6] IU/mL), whereas no differences were observed in children regardless of symptoms. Moreover, differences in cellular immune responses were observed in adults compared with children with seroconversion. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that among patients with mild COVID-19, children may be less likely to have seroconversion than adults despite similar viral loads. This finding has implications for future protection after SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and for interpretation of serosurveys that involve children. Further research to understand why seroconversion and development of symptoms are potentially less likely in children after SARS-CoV-2 infection and to compare vaccine responses may be of clinical and scientific importance.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , COVID-19/imunologia , Imunoglobulina G/sangue , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Adulto , Fatores Etários , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Soroconversão , Vitória/epidemiologia , Carga Viral
8.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0263627, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35320286

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Serological testing for SARS-CoV-2 plays an important role for epidemiological studies, in aiding the diagnosis of COVID-19, and assess vaccine responses. Little is known on dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 serology in African settings. Here, we aimed to characterize the longitudinal antibody response profile to SARS-CoV-2 in Ethiopia. METHODS: In this prospective study, a total of 102 PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients were enrolled. We obtained 802 plasma samples collected serially. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were determined using four lateral flow immune-assays (LFIAs), and an electrochemiluminescent immunoassay. We determined longitudinal antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 as well as seroconversion dynamics. RESULTS: Serological positivity rate ranged between 12%-91%, depending on timing after symptom onset. There was no difference in positivity rate between severe and non-severe COVID-19 cases. The specificity ranged between 90%-97%. Agreement between different assays ranged between 84%-92%. The estimated positive predictive value (PPV) for IgM or IgG in a scenario with seroprevalence at 5% varies from 33% to 58%. Nonetheless, when the population seroprevalence increases to 25% and 50%, there is a corresponding increases in the estimated PPVs. The estimated negative-predictive value (NPV) in a low seroprevalence scenario (5%) is high (>99%). However, the estimated NPV in a high seroprevalence scenario (50%) for IgM or IgG is reduced significantly to 80% to 85%. Overall, 28/102 (27.5%) seroconverted by one or more assays tested, within a median time of 11 (IQR: 9-15) days post symptom onset. The median seroconversion time among symptomatic cases tended to be shorter when compared to asymptomatic patients [9 (IQR: 6-11) vs. 15 (IQR: 13-21) days; p = 0.002]. Overall, seroconversion reached 100% 5.5 weeks after the onset of symptoms. Notably, of the remaining 74 COVID-19 patients included in the cohort, 64 (62.8%) were positive for antibody at the time of enrollment, and 10 (9.8%) patients failed to mount a detectable antibody response by any of the assays tested during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal assessment of antibody response in African COVID-19 patients revealed heterogeneous responses. This underscores the need for a comprehensive evaluation of seroassays before implementation. Factors associated with failure to seroconvert needs further research.


Assuntos
Formação de Anticorpos , COVID-19/imunologia , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Adulto , Anticorpos Antivirais/imunologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/métodos , Etiópia/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoensaio , Estudos Longitudinais , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Gravidade do Paciente , Estudos Prospectivos , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos
10.
CMAJ ; 194(9): E350-E360, 2022 03 07.
Artigo em Francês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35256397

RESUMO

CONTEXTE: La pandémie de COVID-19 a affecté de manière disproportionnée les travailleurs de la santé. Nous avons voulu mesurer la séroprévalence du SRAS-CoV-2 chez les travailleurs de la santé dans les hôpitaux du Québec, au Canada, après la première vague de la pandémie, afin d'explorer les facteurs associés à la SRAS-CoV-2-séropositivité. MÉTHODES: Entre le 6 juillet et le 24 septembre 2020, nous avons recruté des travailleurs de la santé de 10 hôpitaux, dont 8 d'une région où l'incidence de la COVID-19 était élevée (région de Montréal) et 2 de régions du Québec où l'incidence était faible. Les travailleurs de la santé admissibles étaient des médecins, des infirmières, des préposées aux bénéficiaires et des préposés à l'entretien ménager travaillant dans 4 types d'unité de soins (urgences, soins intensifs, unité hospitalière COVID-19 et unité hospitalière non-COVID-19). Les participants ont répondu à un questionnaire et subi un dépistage sérologique du SRAS-CoV-2. Nous avons identifié les facteurs ayant un lien indépendant avec une séroprévalence plus élevée. RÉSULTATS: Parmi les 2056 travailleurs de la santé recrutés, 241 (11,7 %) se sont révélés SRAS-CoV-2-positifs. Parmi eux, 171 (71,0 %) avaient déjà reçu un diagnostic de COVID-19. La séroprévalence a varié d'un hôpital à l'autre, de 2,4 %­3,7 % dans les régions où l'incidence était faible, à 17,9 %­32,0 % dans les hôpitaux ayant connu des éclosions touchant 5 travailleurs de la santé ou plus. La séroprévalence plus élevée a été associée au fait de travailler dans un hôpital où des éclosions sont survenues (rapport de prévalence ajusté 4,16, intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % 2,63­6,57), au fait d'être infirmière ou auxiliaire (rapport de prévalence ajusté 1,34, IC à 95 % 1,03­1,74), préposée aux bénéficiaires (rapport de prévalence ajusté 1,49, IC à 95 % 1,12­1,97) et d'ethnicité noire ou hispanique (rapport de prévalence ajusté 1,41, IC à 95 % 1,13­1,76). La séroprévalence moindre a été associée au fait de travailler dans une unité de soins intensifs (rapport de prévalence ajusté 0,47, IC à 95 % 0,30­0,71) ou aux urgences (rapport de prévalence ajusté 0,61, IC à 95 % 0,39­0,98). INTERPRÉTATION: Les travailleurs de la santé des hôpitaux du Québec ont été exposés à un risque élevé d'infection par le SRAS-CoV-2, particulièrement lors des éclosions. Il faudra travailler à mieux comprendre la dynamique de la transmission du SRAS-CoV-2 dans les milieux de soins.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais/análise , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/métodos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos , Adulto , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/virologia , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Quebeque/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos
12.
J Infect Chemother ; 28(6): 780-785, 2022 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35256268

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The diagnostic accuracy of antigen testing of anterior nasal (AN) samples for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has not been evaluated in the Japanese population. This study assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test (rapid antigen test) using AN samples. METHODS: Two AN samples and one nasopharyngeal (NP) sample were collected from individuals undergoing screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection. The results of the rapid antigen test and the reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test using AN samples were compared to those of RT-PCR tests using NP samples. RESULTS: Samples were collected from 800 participants, 95 and 110 of whom tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 on RT-PCR tests of AN and NP samples, respectively. The overall sensitivity/specificity of the AN rapid antigen test and AN RT-PCR were 72.7%/100% and 86.4%/100%, respectively. In symptomatic cases, the sensitivities of the AN rapid antigen test and AN RT-PCR were 84.7% and 94.9%, respectively. In asymptomatic cases, the sensitivities of the AN rapid antigen test and AN RT-PCR were 58.8% and 76.5%, respectively. The sensitivity of the AN rapid antigen test was over 80% in cases with cycle threshold (Ct) values < 25; it significantly decreased with an increase in the Ct values (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The rapid antigen test with AN samples had a favorable sensitivity, especially in symptomatic cases or in cases with Ct values < 25. It gave no false-positive results. Compared with AN-RT PCR, the AN rapid antigen test had a modestly lower sensitivity in asymptomatic cases.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Humanos , Nasofaringe , Estudos Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
13.
J Infect Chemother ; 28(6): 840-843, 2022 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35277343

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Since respiratory sample collection is an uncomfortable experience, simultaneous detection of pathogens with a single swab is preferable. We prospectively evaluated the clinical performance of a newly developed antigen test QuickNavi-Flu+COVID19 Ag (Denka Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) which can detect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and influenza viruses at the same time with a single testing device. METHODS: We included those who were suspected of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and were referred to a PCR center at Ibaraki prefecture in Japan, between August 2, 2021 to September 13, 2021, when the variant carrying L452R spike mutation of SARS-CoV-2 were prevalent. Additional nasopharyngeal samples and anterior nasal samples were obtained for the antigen test and were compared with a reference real-time reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) using nasopharyngeal samples. RESULTS: In total, 1510 nasopharyngeal samples and 862 anterior nasal samples were evaluated. During the study period, influenza viruses were not detected by QuickNavi-Flu+COVID19 Ag and reference real-time RT-PCR. For SARS-CoV-2 detection in nasopharyngeal samples, the sensitivity and specificity of the antigen test were 80.9% and 99.8%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity using anterior nasal samples were 67.8% and 100%, respectively. In symptomatic cases, the sensitivities increased to 88.3% with nasopharyngeal samples and 73.7% with anterior nasal samples. There were three cases of discrepant results between the antigen test and the real-time RT-PCR. All of them were positive with the antigen test but negative with the real-time RT-PCR in SARS-CoV-2 detection. CONCLUSION: A combo kit, QuickNavi-Flu+COVID19 Ag, showed an acceptable sensitivity and sufficient specificity for SARS-CoV-2 detection, especially using nasopharyngeal sample collected from symptomatic patients.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Antígenos Virais/análise , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Humanos , Nasofaringe , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
14.
Microbiol Spectr ; 10(2): e0196221, 2022 Apr 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35348350

RESUMO

Increasing the diagnostic capacity for COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 infection) is required to improve case detection, reduce COVID-19 expansion, and boost the world economy. Rapid antigen detection tests are less expensive and easier to implement, but their diagnostic performance has been questioned compared to reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR). Here, we evaluate the performance of the Standard Q COVID-19 antigen test for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection and predicting contagiousness compared to RT-PCR and viral culture, respectively. The antigen test was 100.0% specific but only 40.9% sensitive for diagnosing infection compared to RT-PCR. Interestingly, SARS-CoV-2 contagiousness is highly unlikely with a negative antigen test since it exhibited a negative predictive value of 99.9% compared to viral culture. Furthermore, a cycle threshold (CT) value of 18.1 in RT-PCR was shown to be the one that best predicts contagiousness (area under the curve [AUC], 97.6%). Thus, screening people with antigen testing is a good approach to prevent SARS-CoV-2 contagion and allow returning to daily activities. IMPORTANCE The importance of our results is the excellent agreement between the Standard Q COVID-19 antigen test and the viral culture, indicating that it is important as a marker of contagiousness. Due to its high positive predictive value in situations of a high prevalence of infection, positive results do not require confirmation with another test. Likewise, its high negative predictive value for contagiousness makes possible to use this test as a criterion to discharge patients in isolation and screen people moving into environments that could facilitate the transmission of the virus. Screening people with antigen testing is a good approach to prevent SARS-CoV-2 contagion and allow returning to daily activities.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Antígenos Virais/análise , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
15.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0264929, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35271622

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: People experiencing homelessness who live in congregate shelters are at high risk of SARS-CoV2 transmission and severe COVID-19. Current screening and response protocols using rRT-PCR in homeless shelters are expensive, require specialized staff and have delays in returning results and implementing responses. METHODS: We piloted a program to offer frequent, rapid antigen-based tests (BinaxNOW) to residents and staff of congregate-living shelters in San Francisco, California, from January 15th to February 19th, 2021. We used the Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate the implementation. RESULTS: Reach: We offered testing at ten of twelve eligible shelters. Shelter residents and staff had variable participation across shelters; approximately half of eligible individuals tested at least once; few tested consistently during the study. Effectiveness: 2.2% of participants tested positive. We identified three outbreaks, but none exceeded 5 cases. All BinaxNOW-positive participants were isolated or left the shelters. Adoption: We offered testing to all eligible participants within weeks of the project's initiation. Implementation: Adaptations made to increase reach and improve consistency were promptly implemented. Maintenance: San Francisco Department of Public Health expanded and maintained testing with minimal support after the end of the pilot. CONCLUSION: Rapid and frequent antigen testing for SARS-CoV2 in homeless shelters is a viable alternative to rRT-PCR testing that can lead to immediate isolation of infectious individuals. Using the RE-AIM framework, we evaluated and adapted interventions to enable the expansion and maintenance of protocols.


Assuntos
Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/métodos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Pessoas em Situação de Rua/estatística & dados numéricos , COVID-19/imunologia , Teste para COVID-19/métodos , California , Surtos de Doenças/prevenção & controle , Habitação , Humanos , Testes Imunológicos/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Projetos Piloto , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidade , São Francisco
16.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0264964, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35298500

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: We performed a longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 seroepidemiological study in healthcare personnel of the two largest tertiary COVID-19 referral hospitals in Mexico City. METHODS: All healthcare personnel, including staff physicians, physicians in training, nurses, laboratory technicians, researchers, students, housekeeping, maintenance, security, and administrative staff were invited to voluntarily participate, after written informed consent. Participants answered a computer-assisted self-administered interview and donated blood samples for antibody testing every three weeks from October 2020 to June 2021. RESULTS: A total of 883 participants (out of 3639 registered employees) contributed with at least one blood sample. The median age was 36 years (interquartile range: 28-46) and 70% were women. The most common occupations were nurse (28%), physician (24%), and administrative staff (22%). Two hundred and ninety participants (32.8%) had a positive-test result in any of the visits, yielding an overall adjusted prevalence of 33.5% for the whole study-period. Two hundred and thirty-five positive tests were identified at the baseline visit (prevalent cases), the remaining 55 positive tests were incident cases. Prevalent cases showed associations with both occupational (institution 2 vs. 1: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.24, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.54-3.25; laboratory technician vs. physician: aOR = 4.38, 95% CI: 1.75-10.93) and community (municipality of residence Xochimilco vs. Tlalpan: aOR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.09-3.79) risk-factors. The incidence rate was 3.0 cases per 100 person-months. Incident cases were associated with community-acquired risk, due to contact with suspect/confirmed COVID-19 cases (HR = 2.45, 95% CI: 1.21-5.00). CONCLUSIONS: We observed that between October 2020 and June 2021, healthcare workers of the two largest tertiary COVID-19 referral centers in Mexico City had similar level of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 than the general population. Most variables associated with exposure in this setting pointed toward community rather than occupational risk. Our observations are consistent with successful occupational medicine programs for SARS-CoV-2 infection control in the participating institutions but suggest the need to strengthen mitigation strategies in the community.


Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , Recursos Humanos em Hospital/estatística & dados numéricos , SARS-CoV-2 , Centros de Atenção Terciária/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/etiologia , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , México/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores de Risco , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos
17.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0265016, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35298515

RESUMO

Serological databases represent an important source of information to perceive COVID-19 impact on health professionals involved in combating the disease. This paper describes SerumCovid, a COVID-19 serological database focused on the diagnosis of health professionals, providing a preliminary analysis to contribute to the understanding of the antibody response to the SARS-CoV-2. The study population comprises 321 samples from 236 healthcare and frontline workers fighting COVID-19 in Vitória de Santo Antão, Brazil. Samples were collected from at least six days of symptoms to more than 100 days. The used immunoenzymatic assays were Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 ELISA IgG and IgA. The most common gender in SerumCovid is female, while the most common age group is between 30 and 39 years old. However, no statistical differences were observed in either genders or age categories. The most reported symptoms were fatigue, headaches, and myalgia. Still, some subjects presented positive results for IgA after 130 days. Based on a temporal analysis, we have not identified general patterns as subjects presented high and low values of IgA and IgG with different evolution trends. Unexpectedly, for subjects with both serological tests, the outcome of IgA and IgG tests were the same (either positive or negative) for more than 80% of the samples. Therefore, SerumCovid helps better understand how COVID-19 affected healthcare and frontline workers, which increases knowledge about the infection and enables direct prevention actions.


Assuntos
Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anticorpos Antivirais/imunologia , Brasil/epidemiologia , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/imunologia , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/métodos , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/estatística & dados numéricos , Bases de Dados como Assunto , Ensaio de Imunoadsorção Enzimática , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoglobulina A/imunologia , Imunoglobulina G/imunologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Adulto Jovem
18.
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci ; 26(2): 643-652, 2022 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35113440

RESUMO

The article aims to elaborate on European policy choices for the prevention of SARS­CoV­2 contagion, with a close focus on the rules and regulations enacted in Italy so far. European states have ruled out generalized vaccination mandates but have so far preferred to exert a form of "moral suasion", through the introduction of a digital certificate which can only be granted to those who are vaccinated, cured of COVID-19 or tested negative through an antigen test in the previous 48 hours. Italy has applied this tool, dubbed "Green Pass", very rigorously: many daily activities, including going to work, are only allowed for those who have the certificate. A one-year Green Pass is issued after vaccination, although data show that vaccine protection may subside gradually over about six months; the cost of the antigen tests every 48 hours is to be borne by the patient. Testing the unvaccinated is essential to contain the spread of the infection, but it would have been more logical to mandate that all the unvaccinated undergo regular testing (for example every ten days), instead of imposing a test every 48 hours only to be allowed to engage in some activities. The authors stress that in order to minimize the risk of future possible pandemics, prevention strategies are needed, and poor countries need to be enabled to vaccinate their populations in order to prevent new variants from developing. The pledges made by world leaders in that regard during the recent G20 summit must therefore be honored, for the sake of global health that never in our lifetime has been so threatened.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Política Pública , Vacinação/psicologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/virologia , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Humanos , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido , Itália/epidemiologia , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Recusa do Paciente ao Tratamento
19.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263327, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35104281

RESUMO

Rapid screening and diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 in the emergency department is important for controlling infections. When polymerase chain reaction tests cannot be rapidly performed, rapid antigen testing is often used, albeit with insufficient sensitivity. Therefore, we evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of combining rapid antigen and antibody test results. This was a retrospective review of patients who visited our emergency department between February and May 2021 and underwent rapid antigen, immunoglobulin G antibody, and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction tests. The study included 1,070 patients, of whom 56 (5.2%) tested positive on reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of rapid antigen testing were 73.7%, 100.0%, and 0.87, respectively. The combined rapid antigen and antibody test result had improved diagnostic accuracy, with 91.2% sensitivity, 97.9% specificity, and an area under the curve of 0.95. The results of the rapid antigen and antibody tests could be combined as a reliable alternative to reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction.


Assuntos
Teste para COVID-19/métodos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Testes Imediatos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoglobulina G/análise , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
20.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0262399, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35157700

RESUMO

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, which started in December 2019, has been posing significant challenges to the health care system worldwide. As the pandemic spreads with rapidly increasing number of positive cases, early diagnosis of infected patients is crucial to successfully limit the spread of the virus. Although the real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) is the recommended laboratory method to diagnose COVID-19 infection, many factors such as availability of laboratory equipment, reagents and trained personnel affect the use of time-consuming molecular techniques. To facilitate on-the-spot diagnosis of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen tests were developed by several different manufacturers. The evaluation of such rapid tests is particularly important due to the recent unanimous agreement by the European Commission Member States on a recommendation setting out a framework for the use of antigen rapid tests that contains a list of the mutually recognized assays and the basis of independent validation protocols. To evaluate the on-field performance of ten commercially available SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid tests (CLINITEST Rapid COVID-19 Antigen Test, GenBody COVID-19 Antigen Test, GENEDIA W COVID-19 Ag Test, Healgen Coronavirus Antigen Rapid Test, Humasis COVID-19 Ag Test, VivaDiag SARS-CoV-2 Ag Rapid Test, Helix i-SARS-CoV-2 Ag Rapid Test, Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test, Abbot COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test and Vazyme SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Detection Kit) and compare with RT-qPCR as a reference method, the Hungarian National Public Health Center provided 1,597 antigen rapid tests to the National Ambulance Service, COVID-testing trucks and two hospitals treating COVID-19 patients. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were determined by performing the rapid test directly from nasopharyngeal swab samples of symptomatic individuals. For strongly positive samples (Ct < 25) sensitivities ranged between 66.7% and 100%, while for positive samples (Ct < 30) they gave a maximum sensitivity of 87.5%. The specificity of the tests was ranging between 79% to 100%. The results presented here are of high importance to the European Commission and also help governmental decision-making regarding the application of the proper rapid tests for screening different at-risk populations. Nonetheless, SARS-Cov-2 rapid tests play an important role in early and on-the-spot diagnosis of potentially infected individuals.


Assuntos
Antígenos Virais/imunologia , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Nasofaringe/virologia , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Probabilidade , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase em Tempo Real , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Manejo de Espécimes , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...